Bamidbar
Book 4: Numbers


MATOS - NOTES ON RASHI COMMENTARY


Chapter 30 - Text Notes

1 Shemos, 34:31, 32.

2 Why record the honor to the leaders here?

3 But Rashi above declared that the heads are mentioned to teach that they were honored by Moshe, yet here he asserts that the teaching is that they were empowered to nullify vows individually. Evidently, the first teaching implies the second. Scripture's unusual mention of their honor here suggests that they were especially distinguished in the area of vows---they could nullify as individuals, while others required a three member panel. (G.A.)

4 The heads of the tribes were the experts. The plural "heads" refers to all those who were empowered to nullify vows individually. (S.C.)

5 Not by one, as only the leaders are so empowered, and not by two, since a deciding opinion is needed in case of deadlock, as with every judicial panel. (R' Nisim, Rosh to Nedarim, ibid)

6 Who have a rudimentary knowledge of vow nullification, and are capable of grasping more intricate concepts. The ignorant, however, are not acceptable. (R' Nisim, ibid.)

7 Vayikra, 17,3--4. There, the Torah forbids the slaughtering of sacrificially sanctified animals outside the Sanctuary.

8 "... to his sons, and to all of Bnei Yisroel. Say to them, 'this is the word, etc.'  " (Vayikra, ibid.)

9 Nedarim, ibid.

10 Shemos, 11:4. "... {Hebrew Ref} ," lit. "This is what Ad-noy said ... ," is not completely definitive, indicating that the Divine message was not revealed to the prophet with clarity and precision. This is not the highest level of prophecy, but it was all that was achieved by the other prophets, and, indeed, by Moshe himself before he surpassed them. The definitive "this is the word [which G-d has commanded]," however, indicates that the message was revealed to the prophet clearly and precisely. This is the surpassing level of prophecy, achieved only by Moshe, the greatest of the prophets. (M. See Rambam, Yesodei Hatorah, 7) Or, the clarity of prophetic vision depended on its purpose. When the prophetic message was intended for the people at that time, as with all the prophets besides Moshe, the vision was unclear, and the imprecise {Hebrew Ref} was used. Similarly, when Moshe informed Pharaoh prophetically that G-d would punish the Egyptians at midnight, he used the phrase {Hebrew Ref} . But when the eternal commandments of the Torah were revealed to Moshe, he was granted clear prophetic vision, and used the definitive "this is the word." (G.A.)

11 Sifri, 2.

12 This only, without variation.

13 The single expert, or the three member panel.

14 The sage from "... he [the one who vowed] may not desecrate his word." (v.3) He may not, but another---the Sage---may release him from his word, and negate its restrictive effect. (Chagigah, 10a) This implies total release, wherein the very words of the vow are retroactively rendered ineffectual, as if they had never been uttered. Indeed, if the vow was violated before the release, no transgression remains. The husband's authorization is from ".. . [her husband] nullifies her vow ..." (v.9) The inference is that the vow is ineffectual from the time of nullification, but not retroactively. If the vow was violated previously, the transgression remains. (M., G.A.)

15 Sifri, ibid.

16 "Konam" is a form of "korbon," sacrifice. (Nedarim, 10a) This food is forbidden to me the way a sacrifice is forbidden for non-Sanctuary use. To be effective, the new prohibition must be compared to the Scriptural prohibition against mundane use of sacred objects, from {Hebrew Ref} , lit. "to prohibit a prohibition." The double use of "prohibition" teaches that the new prohibition must be based on an old one. (G.A. See R' Nisim to Nedarim, 2a)

17 The neder---vow is always objective---i.e., it initiates, in some object, the status of something Halachically forbidden (comparable to the sacred status of a sacrifice, which makes it forbidden for mundane use). (Nedarim, 2b) It is not effective in prohibiting intangibles, like a person's actions. (Nedarim, 13b) One may effectively say with the neder form, "this food is forbidden for me" but not, "I will not eat this food." How, then can Rashi cite "that I will not eat" as an example of a neder? Because the neder statement begins with "let it be as a konam to me," indicating that the intent is to prohibit an object, as in the case of a korbon. Although it was not fully articulated, the neder is understood as "let the food be as konam to me, so that, as a result of my neder, I will not eat. (G.A.)

18 Since the neder form can only create a forbidden object (see fn. 17), it must always prohibit activity, and can never obligate a person to perform an activity. One may say, with the neder, "this food is forbidden to me," but not "I may not eat this food." (See Gilyon Hashas to Nedarim, 3b.) Therefore, in discussing the obligation to eat, Rashi digresses from the neder to the "shevuah---oath" form. Unlike the neder, the shevuah is subjective---i.e., it directly obligates the person swearing. Thus, it may be used for positive, as well as negative obligations. (M.)

19 Sifri, 7.

20 From the root {Hebrew Ref} , to profane. One {Hebrew Ref} is dropped in the conjugation. (M.)

21 Sifri, 8.

22 Sifri, 12, from the additional phrase, "...in her youth, while in her father's house." (v. 17), to be understood as, "in her youth, when she is considered to be under her father's jurisdiction." (M., G.A.)

23 Below the age of twelve, whose vows may sometimes be valid, but not always, as explained below. (M.)

24 At the age of twelve and one half.

25 Puberty.

26 Nidah, 45b.

27 Perhaps he simply instructed her to violate it---she vowed for example to prohibit wine, and he told her to drink it. (G.A.)

28 V. 9.

29 Sifri, 16.

30 By refusing to enter the land. (32:7)

31 Which annointed me as king, not turn my head from admonishment.

32 Tehillim, 141:5.

33 14:34.

34 Our passage concerns the father's nullification, but Rashi's remarks are from Sifri to v. 13, where the husband nullified. Rashi, therefore, follows Sifri, and mentions the husband. (G.A.)

35 Because of her wicked intention. (Nazir, 23a.)

36 Is it not self evident that sinners require forgiveness? Still, our passage mentions forgiveness when the vow was nullified. (M.)

37 Sifri, 17.

38 The "arusah" is a woman in the preliminary "erusin" stage of marriage, when the couple are considered man and wife, but do not live in the same home, or engage in marital relations.

39 The "nesuah" has undergone the consummate "nisuin" stage. She has entered her husband's home, and the couple engage in marital relations.

40 V. 11.

41 Our passage mentions the "arusah" to distinguish her from the "nesuah," who has left her father's jurisdiction. (S.C.)

42 Together, as Rashi explains. Thus, our verse combines with v.6, which delineates the father's role in the annulment. (G.A.)

43 Nedarim, 67a.

44 If he did either, then his daughter's vow is no longer subject to her husband's decision. (M.)

45 Sifri, 20.

46 A full day's silence constitutes tacit endorsement. (M.)

47 V. 17.

48 Verse 4 taught that her father has jurisdiction before her marriage, the addition of v. 17, even after marriage. (M.)

49 Sifri, 31. Another derivation there is from v. 7, which begins with "and," thereby combining the husband's jurisdiction with the father's. This teaches that they annul together. (M)

50 Or to an unmarried bogeres, who, having reached her majority status, leaves her father's jurisdiction, and is responsible for her own vows. (G.A.)

51 Leaving him as the sole arbiter of the vow.

52 Nedarim, 70a.

53 Over whom the husband has sole jurisdiction. The Scriptural order is as follows: Vs. 4--6 are concerned with the father's jurisdiction over his daughter; vs. 7--9 with the husband's over the arusah, in concert with the father; v. 10 with the independent woman's vow; vs. 11--16 with the husband's sole jurisdiction over the nesuah. (G.A.)

54 Sifri, 25.

55 Not to eat, drink, etc. (M.)

56 He may also annul vows which affect the marital bond, for example not to use cosmetics, not to engage in marital relations, etc. (Nedarim, 79b).

57 Sifri, 27. Sifri limits the father's annulment, as well, to distress-causing vows. Rashi, however, omits this. Evidently, Rashi feels that Sifri's opinion does not prevail, since it is not cited by the Talmud. (M. See Ramban, Tosafos Yom Tov to Nedarim, 11:1)

58 79a.

59 Nedarim, 76b derives this from "on the day he heard" (v. 8), not from our passage. Evidently, Rashi means that our passage avoided saying "for a day," which would definitely have indicated a twenty-four hour period. (G.A.) "From day to day" may be understood as "from the day he heard to the beginning of the next day"---i.e., nightfall. (M.)

60 His nullification is ineffective. But if he had merely kept silent, he could then successfully annul. Since our verse does not specify that the day ended, we assume it did not. Only a full day's silence constitutes tacit endorsement (v. 15), so if he had merely been silent, the nullification which followed would be effective. (G.A.)

61 Sifri, 30.

62 He is responsible for her transgression. Because she mistook his ineffectual annulment as valid, she violated her oath.

63 Sifri, ibid.


Chapter 31 - Text Notes

64 The Moavites hired Bil'am (22:6), who later advised them to entice the Israelites into promiscuous behavior (Rashi to 25:1). They were joined by Midianite women, and the resulting sinful acts caused great loss of life (25:9). If Midian deserved punishment, certainly did Moav. (S.C.)

65 22:3.

66 Devorim, 2:9.

67 Because of their forefather Lot, who faithfully protected his uncle Avraham. (G.A., of Bereishis, 19:29)

68 Who converted to Judaism and was the great grandmother of king David. (Rus, 4:22)

69 She converted and was the mother of king Rechav'am, Shlomo's son. (Melachim 1, 14:21)

70 Devorim 2:19 also warns against provoking Ammon.

71 Bava Kama, 38b. Moav was preserved for Rus, Na'amah is mentioned merely in passing (Tosafos there). Or, the preservation was not for the sake of David or Rechav'am as individuals, but for Israel's monarchy, to be perpetuated through the Davidic dynasty, beginning with king David himself, then Shlomo, Rechav'am, etc. Rashi, therefore, mentions both Rus, as David's ancestor, and Na'amah, as the mother of Rechav'am, since both were necessary for the royal Davidic line. (G.A.)

72 Of course Moshe conveyed the mitzvah to them. Why mention it?

73 Sifri, 34.

74 {Hebrew Ref} , "arm."

75 V. 5.

76 Tanchuma, 3. Otherwise, "men" is redundant. Women do not wage war. (S.C.)

77 To fight Amalek. Shemos, 17:9.

78 The tribal heads. Devorim, 1:15.

79 Why "G-d's vengeance," rather than "Israel's vengeance"? (M.Y.)

80 As the Holy One's Name is identified with Yisroel. See Yehoshua, 7:9. (G.A.)

81 From the additional "from all the tribes of Yisroel." Although there were twelve tribes besides Levi, verse 5 counts only twelve thousand warriors. Apparently, Efrayim and Menasheh were considered a single tribe. (M.) Or, the Levites were added so that the merit of their saintliness would bring the army success, but they did not bear arms. V.5 lists the armed warriors. (G.A.)

82 Sifri, 35.

83 Shemos, 17:4.

84 From "were handed over," rather than "Moshe took," or "Moshe sent." (S.C.)

85 From the repetitious "them." (M.)

86 Who was the Kohein Gadol after the death of Aharon. (20:28)

87 25:15.

88 "... to Egypt." (Bereishis, 37:36) Yoseif was also sold to Yishmaelites (ibid, v.28), but the Midianites were more heinous. Because they realized that Yoseif had the potential for great leadership, they sold him to Egypt, where slaves were legally forbidden to rule. (D.D. Cf. Rashi to Bereishis, 41:12)

89 Sifri, 37. Not literally vengeance. Pinchas did not consciously seek to punish the Midianites. Yoseif, who would scrupulously resist the enticement of his master's wife, was sold by the very Midianites who later abandoned a princess to public promiscuity. By the same token, Pinchas, who had courageously executed the guilty princess, was the antithesis of Midian's immorality, and was therefore the proper instrument for their punishment. (G.A.)

90 "[Elozor took one of the daughters of Putiel] ... and she bore him Pinchas" (Shemos, 6:25).

91 {Hebrew Ref} alludes to {Hebrew Ref} , "fattened." Before converting to Judaism, Yisro was an idolator. See Rashi to Shemos, 18:11.

92 {Hebrew Ref} also alludes to {Hebrew Ref} , "scorned." Yoseif scorned his evil inclination, and did not succumb to Potiphar's wife.

93 The additional {Hebrew Ref} in {Hebrew Ref} suggests a two-fold allusion---that of Yisro, and that of Yoseif. (G.A., from Sotah, 43a)

94 A kohein was especially annointed for the purpose of addressing the people when they went to war. (Devorim, 20:2, Rambam, Melachim, 7) Pinchas served in this capacity.

95 Both, the Ark (4:20) and the Golden Headplate (Shemos, 28:36.), are described as sacred. (S.C.)

96 V. 8.

97 "Bil'am ... the Israelites slew by the sword upon those they had slain." (Yehoshua, 13:22)

98 Tanchuma, 4.

99 Pinchas could not possibly have literally held the vessels in his hand. (S.C.)

100 21:26.

101 Sifri, 37.

102 Bil'am had returned to his home in Aram (24:25). Why was he now in Midian? (M.)

103 The Moavite king Balak, promised to reward Bil'am (22:17), Midian did not. Still, the Moavites acted out of fear, the Midianites from hatred (Rashi to v. 2). Bil'am felt that Midian would be more forthcoming in rewarding him. (G.A.)

104 Otherwise, they could not have justifiably executed him, as they were commanded only to wage war against the Midianites. Nor were they informed of his role in their downfall with the Moavite and Midianite women until later (v. 16). (M.)

105 Death, as he was considered a "pursuer" ( {Hebrew Ref} ), someone whose actions endanger the lives of others. His demoralizing advice would have caused the loss of the war and the death of the warriors. (G.A.)

106 Sifri, 39, 40.

107 Otherwise, why mention the sword? (M)

108 Eisav's blessing. (Bereishis, 27:40)

109 Tanchuma, Balak, 8.

110 {Hebrew Ref} from {Hebrew Ref} , "to keep." The keepers of the law were housed in palatial mansions.

111 Yeshosua, 12:2.

112 According to this interpretation, {Hebrew Ref} is from {Hebrew Ref} , "minister."

113 Sifri, 41.

114 Sifri, 42.

115 Shir Hashirim, 6:6.

116 The booty was brought to Moshe (v.12), the plunder retained by the warriors (vs. 32, 53.). Scripture later states that the ornaments were offered to G-d (v. 50), obviously referring to the booty brought to Moshe, rather than to the plunder. The booty is thus defined as ornamental. The plunder, then, must have been non-ornamental---gold and silver. (G.A.)

117 Sifri, 42.

118 Sifri, 43.

119 Yalkut.

120 Sanhedrin, 106a.

121 43. Cf. Rashi to 25:1.

122 "Every woman with intimate knowledge" seems to refer only to women with actual intimate experience. And {Hebrew Ref} , "every woman," implies that the death sentence was only for adult women, exempting even experienced young girls. But v.18 exempts only the young girls who were not intimate, indicating that the young ones with experience were to be killed. To resolve the conflict, we interpret "every woman with intimate knowledge" as referring to those capable of intimate relations, i.e., those above the age of three, when intimate contact is recognized legally as intercourse. They were included in the death sentence. And v. 18 is understood as referring to the young girls incapable of intimate knowledge, i.e., those below the age of three. They were exempted. (D.D., from Yevamos, 60b.)

123 Yevamos, 60b.

124 Sifri, 45.

125 Although Moshe was angry with the commanders for having spared the women (v.15), perhaps he now exempted those who were capable of intimate relations, but had refrained. (S.C.)

126 But why the original "now you must execute [every male]"? To include even those males too young for intercourse. (S.C.)

127 The camp of the Shechinah, was prohibited to those contaminated by contact with the dead. They were permitted, however, in the Levite and Israelite camps. (M. Cf. Rashi to 5:2)

128 A garment or utensil. Other objects, however, do not receive contamination. See Rambam, Keilim, 1:1.

129 He remains contaminated for seven days, and requires the parah adumah ashes for purification (19:11,12). This applies as well if he touched a utensil while it was touching the corpse. However, if the utensil was removed from immediate contact with the body, the person then touching it is contaminated for only one day, and requires only immersion in a mikveh for purification. See Ramban.

130 Sifri, Chukas, 58.

131 Water mixed with the ashes of the red cow is sprinkled on the contaminated person.

132 19:9--12.

133 Unlike Jewish graves and corpses, which convey contamination to those enclosed with them in a tent. (19:14.)

134 Yechezkel, 34:31.

135 "... anyone who enters the tent.. .shall be contaminated." (19:14) The passage concerning touching, however, does not stipulate that the corpse was that of a "man," but merely states that anyone who touches "... a corpse .. .shall be contaminated." (ibid., v.16. See Tosafos to Yevamos, 61a, Bava Kama, 38a)

136 Yevamos, 61a.

137 Rambam, Tum'as mes, 1:13.

138 Of Yisroel.

139 By converting.

140 Sifri, 46.

141 Leather was already mentioned. Why add goats? (S.C., from Rashi to Chulin)

142 Chulin, 25b.

143 Vayikra, 10:16.

144 Forgetting that a grief stricken person ("onen") may not eat sacrificial meat. (Vayikra Rabbah, 12:10.

145 20:10 Moshe was angry with the Israelites.

146 Instead of speaking to it. (Ibid, v. 11)

147 Sifri, 48.

148 Sifri, 48. G-d commanded all of the Torah to Moshe. Why mention it here? Because Elozor wished to dispel the impression that he was replacing Moshe. He reminded them that he was merely instructing the people in the practical application, but G-d had taught the law to Moshe. (G.A.)

149 From an animal that was not properly slaughtered.

150 In case of food particles underneath the rust.

151 Yalkut.

152 The fire itself does not taint the utensil, but the forbidden food absorbed in it, during the cooking process. (M.)

153 A pot used for cooking.

154 Thereby releasing the tiny "treif" food particles absorbed in the walls of the pot. The degree of heat which opened the pores for absorption during the preparation of the non-kosher food reopens them for release during purging. Thus, the purging agent must parallel the utensil's use; if used with water for cooking, recooking is sufficient for purging. If used as a spit, reheating over a flame is required.

155 Avodah Zarah, 75b.

156 Accordingly, {Hebrew Ref} is interpreted as "sprinkling" or "flinging" (as in Eichah, 3:53), and refers to the water which is sprinkled to purify those contaminated by contact with the dead. (M.)

157 The process for purification from contamination by the dead was stated previously (19:19). If {Hebrew Ref} means that, why repeat it here? (G.A.)

158 {Hebrew Ref} is not interpreted as "sprinkling," but as [lit.] "set apart," referring to a menstruating woman (Vayikra, 15:19). After her period, she requires immersion in the waters of a mikveh for purification.

159 Enough to immerse the average person. (Avodah Zarah, 75b)

160 In a mikveh.

161 Without the purging mentioned above. However, even cold-use utensils require a thorough scrubbing to remove the residue of prohibited foodstuff attached to their surface. (M. See Ramban)

162 Avodah Zarah, 75b.

163 Pesachim, 67a.

164 Although generally translated as "lift up," {Hebrew Ref} may also mean "receive," or "take," as in Shemos, 23:1. And {Hebrew Ref} , lit. "head" or "top," may be translated as "count," because it is customary for those who take count to record the total sum at the top of the tally sheet. (M.)

165 The spoil refers to the captive people and animals; the plunder to the non-ornamental personal property. (M., from Rashi to v. 11.)

166 The spoil, which was yet to be evenly distributed and tithed, remained after the plunder, which had already been randomly confiscated. (G.A.)

167 Rashi supplies the missing words: "... which Moshe divided [for the community, by appropriating it for them] from the military men." (G.A.)

168 We know that the community's animals and people numbered the same as those of the military, enumerated above. The point of the repetition here is not for the numbers themselves, but as a preface to v. 47, which describes Moshe's appropriation to the Levites. (G.A.)

169 {Hebrew Ref} (Megilah, 2:3), however, refers to someone who appoints others to perform a task.

170 Bereishis, 31:39. Yaakov told Lavan that he would accept responsibility for any loss.

171 Shmuel 1, 20:18. Yonasan told David that his absence would be noticed.

172 Ibid., v. 25.

173 Shabbos, 64a. The {Hebrew Ref} exemption, permitting relations with a gentile captive during wartime (Devorim, 21:11), applied only after the conquest of Eretz Yisroel. (S.C. See Tosafos to Shabbos, 64a, D.D.)


Chapter 32 - Text Notes

174 Although Reuvein and Gad waited with their petition until after the conquest of Midian, their request was not for Midianite land, but for the land of Sichon and Og. (M.)

175 The {Hebrew Ref} prefix.

176 Not Kadeish, belonging to Barnei'a, as in "the plains of Mamrei" (Bereishis, 13:18), but Kadeish Barnei'a. Why, then, does Scripture sometimes mention "Kadeish" alone (20:14, 33:37, etc.)? Because there were two places named Kadeish---one Kadeish Barnei'a, and one simply Kadeish. Scripture's "Kadeish" refers to the latter. (M.)

177 The proof is that Kaleiv's mother bore Osniel, the son of Kenaz. (Shoftim, 3:9, identifies Osniel, son of Kenaz, as Kaleiv's younger brother.) Evidently, his mother later married Kenaz and bore Osniel. Kaleiv was entitled "the Kenizite" after his step-father. (M.)

178 Sotah, 11b.

179 Kayin's punishment, Bereishis, 4:12.

180 Yeshaya, 29:1.

181 Yirmeyah, 7:21.

182 From the precedence of the children in Moshe's reply [v.24]. (S.C.)

183 Tanchuma, 7.

184 Yeshaya, 8:3.

185 Ibid, 5:19.

186 Devorim, 33:20.

187 The book of Devorim.

188 3:18.

189 The first city to fall to the invading Israelites.

190 Yehoshua, 6:13.

191 But not afterward. Their dwelling place at that time was not relevant to the present discussion. (M.)

192 The Israelites had destroyed the old ones during the warfare. (M.)

193 Now, when the people were camped east of the Yardein. In relation to Eretz Yisroel itself, however, "across the Yardein" refers to the east bank. (G.A.)

194 Tehillim, 8:8.

195 As in {Hebrew Ref} , "sheep."

196 {Hebrew Ref} is used specifically to refer to large multitudes of sheep. (G.A.)

197 As a personal pledge for the sake of Heaven, but not as a matter of obligation. (M., G.A.)

198 V. 22.

199 V. 18.

200 As recorded in Yehoshua (22). This indicates that they had made such a pledge. (M.)

201 From the singular {Hebrew Ref} . (S.C.)

202 Not lit. commanded "them," but commanded "concerning them"---concerning their fulfillment of the stipulation to do battle.

203 Shemos, 14:14. Here, too, {Hebrew Ref} is not translated literally as "will fight you," but as {Hebrew Ref} , "will fight for your sake." (S.C.)

204 Not literally in the same place---we will be in Eretz Yisroel, while the land will be here. (G.A.)

205 Then, after we fulfill our stipulation, but we have no ownership now. (M., see Ramban to v. 19)

206 If it were unrelated, the reading would be "Bais Nimrah and Bais Haran, which were fortified cities and sheep pens." Why, then, did they have to rebuild them now? (G.A.)

207 Immediately, so that the idolatrous names would no longer be used. But the name change for all the other cities later in our passage took place after they were rebuilt. (M.)

208 The name "Sivmah" is not among those turned aside, but among those built, beginning with v. 34.

209 V. 3.

210 Rus, 2:14.

211 Zechariah, 5:11. Midrash Rus (5:5) indeed expounds the two words, but Rashi's objection is to R' Moshe's interpretation of {Hebrew Ref} as "not Novach." Accordingly, {Hebrew Ref} would imply "not Boaz"---but someone else---said. And {Hebrew Ref} would mean "not a house"---but build something else. Both interpretations are untenable. (S.C.)


Return to Main Search Form
Sources